Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update common.css #67

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update common.css #67

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

ec75413
Copy link

@ec75413 ec75413 commented Apr 30, 2014

A chrome-bookmark-like style. The green style may not match its surroundings enough, so some people may dislike it on the first look.

I just modified the css as little as possible. You, as the author, are welcome to modify the details to combine my suggestion and your design theme. If you want it closer to chrome bookmark bar, some fading effects, I think, are required using js.

Before you implement the self-defined css function or before you find any other css config good enough, you can perhaps adopt this css.

Among all ext's I've searched, yours is the one closest to the chrome original concise new-tab. That's why I try contributing a little to your project.

Good luck to your ext!

A chrome-bookmark-like style. The green style may not match its surroundings enough, so some people may dislike it on the first look.

I just modified the css as little as possible. You, as the author, are welcome to modify the details to combine my suggestion and your design theme. If you want it closer to chrome bookmark bar, some fading effects, I think, are required using js.

Before you implement the self-defined css function or before you find any other css config good enough, you can perhaps adopt this css.

Among all ext's I've searched, yours is the one closest to the chrome original concise new-tab. That's why I try contributing a little to your project.

Good luck to your ext!
@ec75413
Copy link
Author

ec75413 commented May 1, 2014

I see, I forgot to turn on TopSite to test.

What I see is that all 's in topsites do not change lines automatically. So "display: block" is required for them.

However, "display: block" is redundant for those contained in div.bookmarks-container. So maybe I tend to define another css set for those in TopSite.

For example,

<a class="textanchor bookmark"> boomark1 </a>....
<a class="textanchor top-sites"> topsite1 </a>...

a.textanchor defines the properties they have in common;
a.bookmark and a,top-sites defines their own properties.

It's my web design style, just for your reference.

I simply put back the "display:block" in a.bookmark. But this property is also defined in div.bookmarks-container .bookmark. I'm not sure why chrome chooses the latter when a conflict occurs. More details can be seen in my previous post.
@jimschubert
Copy link
Owner

I think my point is that it's not redundant.

div.bookmarks-container .bookmark is a more detailed selector which means
I can tweak the bookmark class for only those bookmarks within that
container.

I also didn't check the options page to see if it was also displayed oddly.
On May 1, 2014 12:38 AM, "ec75413" [email protected] wrote:

I see, I forgot to turn on TopSite to test.

What I see is that all 's in topsites do not change lines automatically.
So "display: block" is required for them.

However, "display: block" is redundant for those contained in
div.bookmarks-container. So maybe I tend to define another css set for
those in TopSite.

For example,

boomark1 ....
topsite1 ...

a.textanchor defines the properties they have in common;
a.bookmark and a,top-sites defines their own properties.

It's my web design style, just for your reference.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/67#issuecomment-41879486
.

@ec75413
Copy link
Author

ec75413 commented May 1, 2014

How about defining "display: block;" in "div.top-sites-wrapper .inner a.bookmark" selector? In my style, i may do that.

@jimschubert
Copy link
Owner

Yeah that may make more sense.

The reason I have this bookmark class in the first place is because I plan
to create different built in views, where the elements all look the same or
similar.

I probably should have moved all block definitions to the more specific
rule.

As a web developer, would you find value in it if the specificity was
commented on rules like this? http://www.w3.org/TR/selectors/#specificity
On May 1, 2014 7:08 AM, "ec75413" [email protected] wrote:

How about defining "display: block;" in "div.top-sites-wrapper .inner
a.bookmark" selector? In my style, i may do that.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/67#issuecomment-41900316
.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants